Re: [RFC] [DISCUSSION] Reliable user-land CSPRNG

Hi On 24 February 2015 at 21:33, Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com> wrote: > Padraic, > > On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Pádraic Brady <padraic.brady@gmail.com> wrote: >> Hi >> >> On 24 February 2015 at 20:04, Anthony Ferrara <ircmaxell@gmail.com> wrote: >>> If random_bytes() is harder than uniqid(), it's a non-starter. >> >> Technically, it will be harder than uniqid() if producing strictly >> random bytes (if output needs to be printable/readable). >> That's not a "bad" thing obviously! > > Sure. But does that indicate the need for a "random_string()" function? It would be more random than a stream of 0-9 integer characters, and probably useful compared to base64'ing a byte stream. I'm afraid to go survey how its done in the wild right now. Possibly? Paddy -- Pádraic Brady http://blog.astrumfutura.com http://www.survivethedeepend.com